Old Rubber, Low Miles - BMW M5 Forum and M6 Forums
E39 M5 and E52 Z8 Discussion 1998-2003 Advertiser's Forum

 2Likes
  • 2 Post By CSBM5
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Rate Thread Display Modes
post #1 of 8 Old 15th June 2017, 01:05 AM Thread Starter
GriffonM5
Member, Sport: Off DSC: On (>50 posts)
 
Join Date: May 2017
Posts: 87
Thanks: 7
Thanked 6 Times in 5 Posts
Old Rubber, Low Miles

Guys,

A bit of a devil's advocate question here: what is the benefit of spending more for a low-mileage car if the rubber is old?

Here is what I mean: the newest of these cars is now 14 years old. Even with very low mileage (<50k), it seems as though their oil pan gaskets will leak, their rear differential seals will leak, control arm bushings will need replacing, motor/tranny mounts may also have gone bad, shifter bushings may also be rotted, etc. Jack Baruth recently wrote an article for R/T in which he argued that old rubber, essentially, throughout the car makes even low-mileage, nice-condition old German cars not as awesome to drive now as they were new.

I understand that some things inexorably wear with mileage--caramel seats and rod bearings in particular come to mind.

What is the benefit, if any, of paying a significant premium for a low-miles car versus one with higher mileage that has had a lot of these items replaced along the way? I'm thinking of a 50k, bone-stock, all-original car compared with a 150k car that's had a lot of wear items replaced along the way. Thoughts?

Current: 2002 M5, Bluewater/Caramel, 96k. Dinan Stage 1 suspension, Corsa mufflers, UUC SSK, Shark tune.
1999 M3, Hellrot/Sand Beige, 133k
2012 X5, Deep Sea Blue/Oyster, 67k
Past: 2004 M3, 1995 M3

Looking for decent condition Caramel floor mats. PO bought new floor mats...black floor mats.
GriffonM5 is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #2 of 8 Old 15th June 2017, 02:40 AM
amancuso
Addicted Member (>300 posts)
 
amancuso's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2017
Location: Burlington, NJ
Posts: 359
Thanks: 3
Thanked 20 Times in 21 Posts
Garage
Quote:
Originally Posted by GriffonM5 View Post
Guys,

A bit of a devil's advocate question here: what is the benefit of spending more for a low-mileage car if the rubber is old?

Here is what I mean: the newest of these cars is now 14 years old. Even with very low mileage (<50k), it seems as though their oil pan gaskets will leak, their rear differential seals will leak, control arm bushings will need replacing, motor/tranny mounts may also have gone bad, shifter bushings may also be rotted, etc. Jack Baruth recently wrote an article for R/T in which he argued that old rubber, essentially, throughout the car makes even low-mileage, nice-condition old German cars not as awesome to drive now as they were new.

I understand that some things inexorably wear with mileage--caramel seats and rod bearings in particular come to mind.

What is the benefit, if any, of paying a significant premium for a low-miles car versus one with higher mileage that has had a lot of these items replaced along the way? I'm thinking of a 50k, bone-stock, all-original car compared with a 150k car that's had a lot of wear items replaced along the way. Thoughts?
Well, it depends on what you want the car for. Is it something you plan to stick in a garage for 20 years or do you want to drive it? If it's the latter, I recommend finding the healthiest example in your budget. When I was shopping for mine, I had a budget in mind and wanted to stay under 150K miles. I found my car for sale at a new BMW dealer and it had a lot of wear items replaced, such as brakes, belts, and clutch. It also had new headlight adjusters installed as well as a new rearview mirror. Body is straight except for a small depression on the rear of the trunk. It did have some paint work and the bumpers were resprayed. This is what I'd consider normal for a 136,xxx mile car. Best of luck in your hunt!

2003 M5/Sport Imola/Imola
amancuso is offline  
post #3 of 8 Old 15th June 2017, 03:31 AM
Grinder
Member, Sport: On DSC: Off
 
Grinder's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Dallas, TX
Posts: 294
Thanks: 5
Thanked 16 Times in 15 Posts
Even a 0-mile beast will need maintenance at this point. The benefit is peace of mind that the engine internals are all healthy (or healthier), which definitely has a benefit. But a 50k beast that saw 8x track days a year with questionable maintenance vs a well-maintained 150k that was just driven back-and-forth across the country...i'd take the 150k.

Last edited by Grinder; 15th June 2017 at 03:32 AM.
Grinder is offline  
 
post #4 of 8 Old 15th June 2017, 03:54 AM Thread Starter
GriffonM5
Member, Sport: Off DSC: On (>50 posts)
 
Join Date: May 2017
Posts: 87
Thanks: 7
Thanked 6 Times in 5 Posts
Track time, sure. I'm more trying to compare an enthusiast-owned, well-maintained, but high-mileage car versus a low-mileage car that simply wasn't driven a lot and got annual oil changes with not much else.
GriffonM5 is offline  
post #5 of 8 Old 15th June 2017, 02:32 PM
CSBM5
M5 Expert (>4000)
 
CSBM5's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Raleigh, NC
Age: 60
Posts: 7,463
Thanks: 1,641
Thanked 1,505 Times in 1,029 Posts
Thermo-oxidative rubber aging is highly dependent on the environmental conditions the rubber has been exposed to versus time. A car that has low mileage, always garaged in reasonable temperatures, etc, will have a dramatically different aging process than one that has higher mileage and therefore many more heat cycles. Similarly, a high mileage car (or even a low mileage one) that has been outside most of its life will have a dramatically different rubber aging outcome (window surrounds, anything exposed to UV, even door seals due to large heat cycling ranges) for rubber components. It's not a simple "it is this old, so they are all the same" outcome -- an assumption like that could not be further from the actual outcome.

One example is the original front tires off my M5 I had in controlled temperature dark storage for more than 13 years I recently posted a thread on. They look as new. Zero dry rot/aging evidence at all. That said, they should never be used for serious driving of course since it's impossible to "know" the interior quality of the rubber-to-belt bonds with this age tire. However, a tire is a much different component with a totally different service profile than a door seal, window surround, rear main seal, CSB cover, etc.

Hence trying to guess the rubber aging on any given car is futile unless you have documented provenance of the car's storage and usage profile versus it's mileage which would include climate conditions.

All that said, on any used car a thorough inspection of many of the mentioned parts, and more, is required. Speaking of thrust arm bushings...those disintegrate LONG before they even had the thought of rubber aging!

The other point is that what needs "replacing" is actually a subjective measure for every owner...take the recent case of a long time board member who drove his M5 to close to 300k miles and then was stranded when the guibo exploded. He took pride in having that component last that long. Many here, myself included, inspect such parts and replace when they are not providing near new service conditions (i.e. any M5 with 50k miles likely needs a new one imo). He would argue you're spending money needlessly (and with a good reason to back that up). Hence the old adage that when you buy a used car, you're especially buying the previous owner applies very strongly. There are actually many owners who follow the belief that "if it's still rolling, everything's fine".

Current stable:

2019 M2 Competition 6MT LBB, slicktop
2011.5 M3 sedan 6MT Silverstone, slicktop: Dinan front swaybar, Eibach rear swaybar, pins-out-max-camber-up-front, Dinan exhaust, Michelin PS4S, Apex EC-7 9.5/10.5x19
2007 328i wagon Silver/gray: Eibach 28mm front swaybar, E93 M3 rear swaybar, 219M M3 wheels, Michelin PSAS3+
1975 CanAm 125MX2: Stock, original owner

Last edited by CSBM5; 15th June 2017 at 02:38 PM.
CSBM5 is offline  
post #6 of 8 Old 15th June 2017, 03:18 PM Thread Starter
GriffonM5
Member, Sport: Off DSC: On (>50 posts)
 
Join Date: May 2017
Posts: 87
Thanks: 7
Thanked 6 Times in 5 Posts
GriffonM5 is offline  
post #7 of 8 Old 15th June 2017, 06:07 PM
OptimusPrimeM5
m5board.comoholic (>1000 posts)
 
OptimusPrimeM5's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Virginia
Posts: 1,136
Thanks: 36
Thanked 104 Times in 93 Posts
Im sitting at 63k on my m5 and not my daily, hell it aint my semi monthly or semi yearly but when I searched i was looking for the lowest mile example I could afford. Theres no right or wrong answer on mileage to me it was personal preference to look for one with least amount of exposure to "negative ownership" ie: just drivers of cars. I have shipswright disease so I expected Id be doing bunch work anyway once I got it and started baselining. I also lucked out and found out it was previously owned by board member who did a bunch of PM to the vehicle as well before trading it in.
OptimusPrimeM5 is offline  
post #8 of 8 Old 16th June 2017, 01:07 PM
meangreen94z
Member, Sport: On DSC: On (>100 posts)
 
Join Date: Feb 2017
Posts: 122
Thanks: 0
Thanked 14 Times in 14 Posts
Both may have leaks, but there generally will be a big difference in body, interior and overall driving feel on a car with 50k vs. 150k. Not always though

Last edited by meangreen94z; 16th June 2017 at 01:07 PM.
meangreen94z is offline  
Reply

Bookmarks

Quick Reply
Message:
Options

Register Now



In order to be able to post messages on the BMW M5 Forum and M6 Forums forums, you must first register.
Please enter your desired user name, your email address and other required details in the form below.

User Name:
Password
Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.

Password:


Confirm Password:
Email Address
Please enter a valid email address for yourself.

Email Address:
OR

Log-in











Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page
Display Modes Rate This Thread
Linear Mode Linear Mode
Rate This Thread:



Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
2006 low miles vs. 2009 higher miles? chi knight E60 M5 and E61 M5 Touring Discussion 41 21st August 2013 11:25 PM
Need help: low miles vs. high miles meticulously maintained Spiftacu1ar E39 M5 and E52 Z8 Discussion 41 30th August 2010 02:22 AM
FS: '07 BMW 650i Coupe MINT/LOW LOW MILES - Blk/Blk SpaceGrayGuy Cars For Sale or Wanted 5 24th November 2007 10:03 PM
Low Miles on this 02 gbogh3 Cars For Sale or Wanted 6 17th December 2006 05:41 AM
FS: 2000 540i mint cond ACS kit NAV HID LOW LOW MILES!! acs540i Cars For Sale or Wanted 0 20th September 2006 06:31 AM

Posting Rules  
You may post new threads
You may post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On

 
For the best viewing experience please update your browser to Google Chrome